EPTI'm Glad Channels Aren't A Part Of Battle.net 2.0 - Page 8
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Superiorwolf
United States5509 Posts
| ||
|
Subversive
Australia2229 Posts
You mentioned wc3 channels in your post. Then I suggested, as did LID8 how you could find channels in STARCRAFT. Then you say 'thats all very well and good but what about the new user?' Then a bunch of people who have only just started playing sc tell you (myself included) that this hasn't been a problem for them and that the clan channels they've joined aren't unfriendly or restricted. Then you respond 'Yes but how can you find these mythical channels?' Then a bunch of people give you about 5 ways you can. Mine being the very simplest which is to just click ' Channels'. Seriously how much easier can blizzard make it? You click channel. Then u select one of the 30 or 40 private channels there. You hit enter. No one kicks you. People are generally friendly. So WTF are you talking about? EDIT: On May 28 2010 14:04 Subversive wrote: Here's how you do it. You click that tab on the main screen called 'Channels'. A list of channels comes up. Then what you do is you pick one. Alot aren't private as you assert. So now you're in a channel. Now you can talk to people. Seriously, why are you obstinately making these points? What's funny is that's exactly what I did when I was enterting the channels that I was screenshotting. What non-private channels are you refering to exactly? "Night Elf Tree Of Life"? Empty. The WCG channels that nobody can join? -.-" On May 28 2010 14:26 Subversive wrote: Try starcraft. Aren't we talking about starcraft here not warcraft? If you actually looked at the screenshots, you'd notice that all but two of the channels I've screenshot are Brood War channels. Unless you have some kind of problem with me using a WarCraft client to take the screenshots. Ok see? You mentioned warcraft. Then I mentioned starcraft. Then you said 'i took public channel screenshots from starcraft'. Yes except that's not what we were talking about. You mentioned the Night Elf Tree of Life. That's wc not sc. So go back to what I said before and try it. It's easy for the new user to find private channels. Period. | ||
|
hofodomo
United States257 Posts
On May 28 2010 14:44 LosingID8 wrote: the guy doesn't even have to have a clan tag. i was referring to clan channels in that specific example but so what if his name is "gameon"? i've had stupid non-clan names like T-REX-ATTACK and JoeGuy1234 (100% my real accounts on useast) and i stayed in non-clan-specific private channels. my point is that there isn't just "public" and "clan" channels. if you are into BGH then you've heard of marlboro and )v( as channels where better-than-average players hang out and play with each other, both 3v3 innies as well as 3v3pubsmashes. it isn't hard to find these things out if you actively are looking for a channel. Sure, this is fine. But let's say you are relatively new to the scene, and you ask someone after a game where they hang out. Due to the randomness of the internet, they decide to be an ass, and flame you out. Ouch. It may be anonymous, and even though that person (the one who got flamed) should just buckle up and move on, it still leaves a bad impression...surely to make a newer player think twice before asking again. I'm not saying that it's impossible to find chat channels/communicate this way. In my opinion, I believe the problem lies in the initial difficulty in getting acquainted (once you find I place, I doubt you'll have much trouble again), and that this process is really more complicated than it should be. | ||
|
Superiorwolf
United States5509 Posts
| ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On May 28 2010 14:30 L wrote: I think public channels that you start in by default aren't useful, as the OP points out, but that doesn't change the option for developing meaningful channels. Imagine you had channels called: PvT diamond practice meetup. or ZvT strategy discussion. and that because of the method of joining, the people who joined actually gave a shit about the topics? Whoa. Suddenly shit got crazy. Another brilliant idea for the replacement of battle.net chat channels that highlights the shortcomings of the old system everyone is clamoring for. Thank you. On May 28 2010 14:34 huameng wrote: ComradeDover: Do you think that bnet channels without spam would be an effective solution? If so, certainly you realize why, thanks to the differences between sc2's bnet and bw's bnet, the chat channels of old would work just fine.  If not, you can even assume that there are precreated channels sorted by interests, locations, skill, gametypes, and that these channels will be available for joining on the home page of the new bnet. I don't see how this system could honestly be improved, and the fact that blizzard isn't telling us what they are coming out (And also they aren't simply making some improvements to the chat channel thing, they are creating something totally new.) with is very worrisomeThe spam is only part of the problem. The lack of real discussion is the second part. Besides the spam, what else strikes you about the screenshots? That dispite the huge population of the channels, there's really no discussion taking place. Public chat is either being misused for spam or not used at all. On May 28 2010 14:34 huameng wrote: Also, on ICCUP there was a list of all channels. They were poorly named (since no one wants to type /j op Templars of Twilight, and experiences from actual bnet probably caused almost no one to actually use the list, but it was there. With better labeling and a better interface it would be basically a perfect system I thinkBut the better labling and interface would in itself be a nessessary improvement. That's exactly what I'm saying in the OP. The old system isn't good enough, and we need something better. Blizzard agrees with me (And you, if I'm reading this post correctly). On May 28 2010 14:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: ComradeDover: Multiple people have explained, in detail, how to find private channels. (See last post on page 6.) And I've responded to those multiple people. The process is either based on luck or unsuitable for new players. On May 28 2010 14:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Make some fucking friends, or stop whining about how hard it is to locate these channels. Pardon me. I'm not whining about anything. I'm clarifying Blizzard's stance and giving original support for their claims. The people complaining are the ones who seem to be unhappy with this stance and/or can't wait until after launch. On May 28 2010 14:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: The basic, public channels need to be spam-filtered, sure. Or if they want to remove some default public channels (because fixing spam is too monumental a task for Blizzard), they should at least keep in private channels as a function, so you can still meet up with a group of friends or a clan or whatever, just like everyone (except for you, apparently) did with the other Blizzard games. YOU don't need to use the channels if you don't want to. Other people still want to use them. You might as well be saying, "Well, I'm a Protoss player, but I don't really use air units... let's just take them out. I won't mind." Please read my OP again. Carefully this time. I am NOT saying do away with channels altogether. I have shown you what Blizzard's stance is and why they're doing the right thing. There WILL be a suitable replacement for chat channels after launch. You've completely misread everything I've written, so I'm going to say it here very plainly: The old system is broken. It needs to be fixed or replaced with something better. Understand? On May 28 2010 14:36 Superiorwolf wrote: This is not the experience of the average battle.net user. People are more friendly than you think. First of all, I've never heard of a channel being "restricted" to clan members only, and second of all, most channels don't arbitrarily ban visitors. Maybe this is how it was on WC3 or something, but definitely not on Broodwar. The last custom game I played began with one player saying (word for word) "SUP FAGGOTS. ARE YOU READY FOR SOME GOD DAMN TURRET DEFENSE?! FUCK YEAH!!1! IMMA SNAP YOUR NECK LIKE IT'S A GOD DAMN BABY CARROT". I wasn't offended and actually found it pretty funny, but I don't see this kind of behavior being considered "friendly" by anyone. | ||
LosingID8
CA10828 Posts
On May 28 2010 14:48 hofodomo wrote: Sure, this is fine. But let's say you are relatively new to the scene, and you ask someone after a game where they hang out. Due to the randomness of the internet, they decide to be an ass, and flame you out. Ouch. It may be anonymous, and even though that person (the one who got flamed) should just buckle up and move on, it still leaves a bad impression...surely to make a newer player think twice before asking again. I'm not saying that it's impossible to find chat channels/communicate this way. In my opinion, I believe the problem lies in the initial difficulty in getting acquainted (once you find I place, I doubt you'll have much trouble again), and that this process is really more complicated than it should be. you should read what i originally wrote. i said "if you play a gg vs a person" (it could be "with" if you played on the same team) then you would ask them for their channel. not if you are a terrible 30 apm ally where they were cussing you out all game due to frustration. here's a real example of the frustration i'm talking about: [22:01] mr*****3: fuck [22:01] mr*****3: what a fucking idiot [22:01] mr*****3: we had a shitty terran on our team [22:01] mr*****3: he blocks his choke with 2 supply 3 bunk [22:01] mr*****3: then makes 2 factory with add on [22:01] mr*****3: and starts making tanks [22:02] mr*****3: until he has 10 tanks sieged behind his gay block [22:02] mr*****3: and then he makes 2 starport [22:02] mr*****3: he says wait for drop [22:02] mr*****3: and what he ends up doing is [22:02] mr*****3: ferrying 2 tanks at a time [22:02] mr*****3: using 1 dropship [22:02] mr*****3: over his block [22:02] mr*****3: he asks me "what the fuck do i do" [22:02] mr*****3: so i say, move your tanks out to the middle [22:02] mr*****3: and hold middle or something [22:03] mr*****3: with the other teammate [22:03] mr*****3: he tells me to keep waiting [22:03] mr*****3: and then the ferry punchline just [22:03] mr*****3: pushed me over the edge and i went ballistic the reason why the "average" bnet player can't find these good private channels is because they play like shit when i was a good ally with a random player i've never played with before and i asked him for channel so we could team up again i have NEVER had anyone flame me. and no, it's not because i'm a good bw player. i'm D+ at best. | ||
|
d_so
Korea (South)3262 Posts
or clan DXD with 3 separate channels of people desperate for dota status, all the while talking mad smack and, strangely, building friendships simultaneously. and there was nothing better than being a mod of said channel and just raping idiots left and right with -timeban xxxx 240 cool down. spam bots do suck. dxd got spammed like NUTS from competitors and it was quite a horrible, unnerving, disruptive experience (relative to dota, i'm not saying this shook up my life or something). but the leaders of dxd (luv u tri, hunter, adam) worked like gangbusters to stop those spam bots, independently, with very little thanks and with Blizzard's Warden actually exacerbating the situation. so i also hoped bnet 2.0 would do what our DXD leaders tried to do: stop the spam bots while giving us all the conveniences and fun of a chat channel. i thought they would remove the malignant tumor to protect the healthy heart; i didn't think they'd actually remove the entire heart to prevent the tumor. but it seems they're more content doing the latter. | ||
|
hofodomo
United States257 Posts
On May 28 2010 14:51 Superiorwolf wrote: I understand your intent to help out the new user, but I also feel like all throughout the internet there are situations like these. People experience the nature of the internet at some point in their lives. And I believe that for SC2, Blizzard should be there to help them along the way: by providing a more efficient way of knowing what sort of channel to browse for and join. How? No clue--I'd be working for Blizzard already if I could come up with something that fast. | ||
|
Zhek
Canada342 Posts
I read the whole article. So basicly, main chats where you -log in- first are filled with spam, no shit! The importance of chat channels rest in its usage by clans and other communities. Let's face it, no one hangs in Brood-War-US-1 and chat there. You could /join Town Square for some good ol' fashion RP. You could /join Clan Fubar and chat with people you know and befriended from said clan Fubar. So the entrance channels are spammed by bots. Big deal, just /join DT Rush or something. I know me and some irc friends go /join puzzle so we can chat there after a game on ICCUP. | ||
|
Karok
Netherlands142 Posts
| ||
|
Subversive
Australia2229 Posts
On May 28 2010 14:51 ComradeDover wrote: Please read my OP again. Carefully this time. I am NOT saying do away with channels altogether. I have shown you what Blizzard's stance is and why they're doing the right thing. There WILL be a suitable replacement for chat channels after launch. You've completely misread everything I've written, so I'm going to say it here very plainly: The old system is broken. It needs to be fixed or replaced with something better. Understand? Wow be more condescending. Here's what your OP says: First up the title "I'm Glad Channels Aren't A Aren't of Battlenet" Next Probably not, but chat channels are absolutely not the answer. I'm glad they're gone and I hope they stay in the past where they belong. Don't try and backtrack and say you never said you wanted to do away with channels altogether because that's simply not true. | ||
|
RageOverdose
United States690 Posts
The solution from hoborg only proves the point the OP is making: the constant spam makes channels useless to common users (players who don't belong to a niche). All you did was provide ample examples that are solutions to the lack of channels. If that is a method for finding channels, and it also applies to games that lack that type of functionality, then channels are unnecessary, because those very things can lead you to more functional software, such as Ventrilo, which allows you to hang out with your Starcraft friends when you are not even playing or have the program running. LosingID8's solution also only serves to prove OP's point that they are not needed. You can message players that you have just played with by simply clicking on their name in the match summary page and choosing "Chat" in the menu. There, you can add players however, talk to players, regame, or ask players where they hail from (probably not invite to party though). In summary: First example negates the need of chat channels. Second example still exists in some form in SC2. In case you need proof of the chat option, here are some screenshots: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g106/Lucrative/chatinSC201.png) ![[image loading]](http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g106/Lucrative/chatinSC202.png) | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44313 Posts
The last custom game I played began with one player saying (word for word) "SUP FAGGOTS. ARE YOU READY FOR SOME GOD DAMN TURRET DEFENSE?! FUCK YEAH!!1! IMMA SNAP YOUR NECK LIKE IT'S A GOD DAMN BABY CARROT". I wasn't offended and actually found it pretty funny, but I don't see this kind of behavior being considered "friendly" by anyone. Yes, because a sample size of 1 is always the standard quantity. Or it's 6, like your spam channels. Out of dozens or hundreds. There WILL be a suitable replacement for chat channels after launch. You've completely misread everything I've written, so I'm going to say it here very plainly: The old system is broken. It needs to be fixed or replaced with something better. Understand? You really don't get it, do you? First of all, you don't think it needs to be fixed. You want channels to be gone permanently, BECAUSE THAT'S THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD. Next, there doesn't NEED to be a replacement. In fact, there SHOULDN'T be, because we've all given plenty of reasons why channels were great. And you gave two reasons why channels weren't great: 1. Spam on a few channels (which could potentially be filtered in the future anyway, or just ignored with private channels) 2. Not everyone can find easily-found private channels (which can be worked out with these other Facebook/ friends list supplements anyways, so it's a non-issue) Quite frankly, the people who used channels shouldn't suffer because of a little spam or because other people didn't ask around for private channels (and YES, you can DO THIS). At this point in time, I'm fairly certain you're just trolling for responses, so I'm done here. | ||
|
AcrossFiveJulys
United States3612 Posts
For the love of god I hope you argued blizzard's side on purpose so that posters in this thread can dismantle your argument, and hope that blizzard sees this thread and realizes how flawed their viewpoint is. | ||
|
hofodomo
United States257 Posts
On May 28 2010 14:56 LosingID8 wrote: you should read what i originally wrote. i said "if you play a gg vs a person" (it could be "with" if you played on the same team) then you would ask them for their channel. not if you are a terrible 30 apm ally where they were cussing you out all game due to frustration. I have read your post in its entirety, and I agree with you on some points. I remember an instance in WC3 where some random teammate added me to his friendslist for a well-played comeback...we played a few games together afterwards. However, while this is certainly a method to become introduced to channels, this is not a reliable method for Blizzard to base their game on. We could have very well lost that game, and not have been so friendly. Such an opportunity may come again in the future, but basically I will lose that opportunity until this time comes. Again, I completely agree with the prospect of your argument, but it is simply seems too unreliable. I mean, I really don't know. New players will inevitably have to stumble their way around places, simply because the chat channels are not optimally set up. Come to think of it, pretty much everything on the past few pages differed from the original thread direction... But my takeaway points: --Hard for new players to initially get acquainted (to private channels) --Unless Blizzard is planning to implement a channel system that both blocks out spam (wishful thinking) as well as allow newer plays to browse and become acquainted to "quality channels" reliably, the channel system is not as necessary as it seems | ||
|
Christmastaflex
United States35 Posts
| ||
|
Zocat
Germany2229 Posts
Is it still viable as a mean of communication / socializing? Sure, I bet some people will use it. So what is wrong with the feature "(Private) Chat Channels" being implemented? Will it be used by everyone? Nope. Will it be a viable mean of communication / sozializing? Yes. Who needs a friend system anyway? There will be people who will never add a friend. So it isn't for everyone? According to the "Anti-Chat Channel"-Logic we sure don't need a friend system then. Or UMS. Or FFA. Or 4vs4. Or 3vs3. Or 2vs2. Or 1vs1. Or the Solo Campaign. Having multiple options to chose from is just adding to the game. If you don't like something then don't use it. Let other people who enjoy using it have fun. | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On May 28 2010 14:58 Zhek wrote: So I'm gonna throw 8 pages of replies and only reply to the OP. That'd probably be best. On May 28 2010 14:58 Zhek wrote: I read the whole article. So basicly, main chats where you -log in- first are filled with spam, no shit! The importance of chat channels rest in its usage by clans and other communities. Let's face it, no one hangs in Brood-War-US-1 and chat there. You could /join Town Square for some good ol' fashion RP. You could /join Clan Fubar and chat with people you know and befriended from said clan Fubar. I'm glad you mention Town Square. Firstly, in the years between my 1998 Diablo 1 experience, that awful channel is finally dead and gone, at least on USWest. Secondly, I could considering using battle.net chat as some kind of text-based RPG to be fall under the "misuse" mentioned in the interviews. On May 28 2010 14:58 Zhek wrote: So the entrance channels are spammed by bots. Big deal, just /join DT Rush or something. I know me and some irc friends go /join puzzle so we can chat there after a game on ICCUP. But the average player don't know about Clan Fubar or DT Rush or Puzzle, and they don't play on ICCup (which, I'm begining to gather from this thread, has a dramatically different channel listing system than Battle.net does. The average Battle.net user is stuck with those initial channels and are left with little way other than the kindness of strangers (Which is a bit rare on the internet) to find their way. This is my point. The system doesn't work for everybody, where it should. | ||
|
BigDatez
Canada434 Posts
| ||
|
LosingID8
CA10828 Posts
On May 28 2010 15:01 RageOverdose wrote: The solution from hoborg only proves the point the OP is making: the constant spam makes channels useless to common users (players who don't belong to a niche). All you did was provide ample examples that are solutions to the lack of channels. If that is a method for finding channels, and it also applies to games that lack that type of functionality, than channels are unnecessary, because those very things can lead you to more functional software, such as Ventrilo, which allows you to hang out with your Starcraft friends when you are not even playing or have the program running. LosingID8's solution also only serves to prove OP's point that they are not needed. You can message players that you have just played with by simply clicking on their name in the match summary page and choosing "Chat" in the menu. There, you can add players however, talk to players, regame, or ask players where they hail from (probably not invite to party though). In summary: First example negates the need of chat channels. Second example still exists in some form in SC2. In case you need proof of the chat option, here is some screenshots: + Show Spoiler + i'm going to trust that you are not trolling and honestly just didn't get the point i was trying to make. the point is NOT to just regame with that 1 player you happened to find that game over and over. when you ask the skilled guy for his CHANNEL he will most likely have other good friends hanging out in that channel, and in that way your circle of available friends to game with increases exponentially! when i played bw actively my /f l was split 50:50 with TL friends and random bnet friends i had made through these channels. also how would you propose that people organize spontaneous 16/32-man tourneys if they have 4 or 5 hours to kill on a saturday afternoon without channels? i have participated in quite a few of them and they were tons of fun, but they were only able to be organized because we would all join a channel where only the participants + tourney admins would be in. also i am interested in your response so feel free to PM me if you want | ||
| ||
